CAP 25 - Part 2 - Concept Submissions

Not open for further replies.


We have the technology.
is a member of the Site Staffis a Top Artistis a Community Leaderis a Community Contributoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Super Moderator Alumnus
CAP Head Mod
Hello everyone and welcome to twenty-fifth iteration of the Create-A-Pokemon Project. In a surprising turn of events, our second step is to decide on a concept that will direct the course of the project, and right here is where you get to submit your ideas. Like the past few projects, CAP 25 is being made for the CAP metagame, so be sure to keep that in mind when making your submissions. And, as always, please read all of the rules before making your post.

NEW: This is a Celebration CAP, meaning that we are going out of our way to break some rules. We'll be creating a set of three Pokemon this time around, a set of Fire, Water, and Grass-type starters! You can read exactly which rules we'll be breaking here and the logic behind Celebration CAPs here. Give these a read-through to get some context.

This thread will be temporarily locked until our Topic Leader reachzero has an opportunity to make an statement. This statement is going to be crazy important for this process, so give it a read through!

The concept will be a guiding force throughout the ensuing project, to ensure the the final result is a cohesive competitive Pokemon. Any discussions, suggestions, or submissions in later topics that do not support the spirit of the Concept will be moderated by the Topic Leader. Concepts must be presented as high-level descriptions of a general idea. They cannot be detailed Pokemon designs. Since we have polls to determine each aspect of the Pokemon, we cannot allow any specific features of the Pokemon to be determined by the details of the Concept. We intentionally have many rules regarding Concept Submissions. If you are not prepared to read and understand all the rules, then don't bother making a submission. These rules are made to help narrow the field of concepts down to those that have been carefully designed. This is not meant to be easy for everyone -- a good, legal Concept requires a lot of thought and careful wording. The following rules must be followed when submitting a Concept:

  • Concepts must work with the mechanics laid out in Pokemon Ultra Sun / Ultra Moon. A concept that requires a custom ability, move, or other element that cannot be found on a Pokemon from Sun or Moon is not allowed. A concept must be feasible with the gameplay mechanics that are currently available. A concept MAY reference Pokemon unique to the CAP metagame, but the concept must be able to be fulfilled by a creation with access to only GameFreak created abilities, moves, etc. In short, "no customs." We are using GameFreak's toolbox.
  • One submission per person. You may edit your Concept, but you may not change the fundamental premise after it has been posted. If editing your concept, please edit the original post instead of posting a new revision. Do not bump your Concept after you have posted it. If people do not comment on it, so be it.
  • Do not duplicate or closely-resemble Concepts already posted by others. It is your responsibility to read through all previous submissions in this thread to ensure you are complying with this rule. Ignorance or laziness is not an excuse.
  • Specific Pokemon types or type combos cannot be included or excluded in a Concept. Nor can other characteristics of the Concept specifically result in in the inclusion or exclusion of Types. For example, the following phrases would be illegal:
"This is a Dragon Pokemon with..." "The Pokemon should be immune to Ghost attacks..." "The Pokemon should have at least 7 resistances..." "The Pokemon should get STAB on Thunderbolt.."​

  • Specific Abilities are not allowed. This applies to existing abilities and new abilities. Do not attempt to circumvent this rule by mentioning specific battle effects that can only be achieved by the implementation of an ability. For example, the following phrases would be illegal:
"This Pokemon should have a defensive ability like Intimidate or Marvel Scale..." "This Pokemon has an ability that steals the opponent's held item..." "When this Pokemon is switched in, all weather conditions are nullified..."​

  • Movepools or lists of moves are not allowed. A specific move can be mentioned if it is the basis for the entire concept. For example, the Concept "Rapid Spinner" would obviously mention the move Rapid Spin.
  • Specific stat bias, base stats, or base stat ratings are not allowed. It is acceptable to use descriptive phrases like "fast", "bulky", "strong attacker", etc -- since there are a variety of ways a Pokemon can fit those descriptions without specifically requiring certain stats. But, do not use overly-specific descriptions that would narrowly constrain the Pokemon's base stat spread.
  • Indications of Physical/Special bias are discouraged, but acceptable if it is essential to the Concept.
  • Do not refer to any part of the Pokemon's artistic design. For example, the following phrases would be illegal:
"This is a bright blue Pokemon..." "The Pokemon looks like a..." "The Pokemon uses its long tail to..."​

  • A Concept Submission must be submitted in the proper format. The format is described below. If the proper format is not used, the moderators will not evaluate the submission, regardless of content.

Concept Submission Format Use this format for all concept submissions: Here is the format with tags. Just copy/paste this into your post, and fill it out:
  • Name - Don't get too clever with the name. If the essence of the concept is not intuitively obvious in the name, then you are hurting your chances of people understanding it. If the essence of your concept cannot be expressed in a few words, then you need to seriously re-evaluate your concept.
  • Description - This is the official description of the concept, and must follow ALL the content rules listed above. Do not make this a long description. Long descriptions are invariably too specific or too convoluted. Keep it short. Any more than a sentence or two is TOO MUCH. Do NOT include your Explanation of the concept in the Description. See "Explanation" below.
  • Justification - Utilizing the CAP Concept Toolkit, craft a concept that can fit into at least one of the following categories: Actualization, Archetype, or Target. Please explicitly state the category names as applicable to your specific justification and explain.
    • Actualization: What is the feeling your Concept Pokemon INSPIRES when used properly in the metagame, do existing Pokemon come close to that, and why or why not?
    • Archetype: What does your Concept Pokemon DO - functionally - in the metagame, and why does the metagame need something with that role? Use Smogon's Pokemon Dictionary to assist with role definitions.
    • Target: What does your Concept Pokemon ADDRESS in the metagame, and why is addressing that target important?

If you cannot justify your concept utilizing one (or more) of the three tools above, then your concept is illegal for the CAP project. (More at the end of the OP)​

  • Questions To Be Answered - The purpose of the CAP project is to learn new things about the metagame, and each concept submission is a proposed "experiment". Each tool has its own specific set of questions, but good concepts often can explain other facets of competitive Pokemon. Use this section to pose those additional questions. Note that this is different from Justification where you are answering tool-related questions, in this section you are proposing questions.
  • Explanation - This can contain just about anything. This is where you can explain your concept without restraint. You may make suggestions, even specific suggestions, regarding the possible implementation of the Concept. This explanation should help facilitate discussion of the Concept -- but the Explanation is NOT part of the Concept and will be omitted from the polls and any future use of the Concept. Since your explanation is non-binding, regarding future polls and threads, it will not be evaluated for purposes of determining if your concept is legal or illegal. Although it is tempting, refrain from making too long of an explanation; it will deter readers from fully considering your concept.
It is the submitter's responsibility to figure out how to make a legal submission within the rules listed above. Do not complain about the difficulty of making a submission in this thread. There are many, many legal concepts that can be presented within the rules. Here are few examples of good and bad Concepts from previous projects:

Good Concepts from Past Projects
"Pure Utility Pokemon"
"Anti-Ghost Rapid Spinner"
"True Garchomp Counter"
"Ultimate Weather Abuser"
"Status Counter"

Bad Concepts from Past Projects
"Ice-Resisting Dragon"
"Super Luck User"
"STAB Explosion Glass Cannon"
"Auto-Stealth Rock Remover"
"A Pokemon with Special Intimidate"
"Pyrokinetic Pokemon (Fire/Psychic)"
"Special Guts"
"Typing Means Nothing"

Note that all good concepts do not specifically dictate anything in later polls. Please try to remember that we are simply pointing the project in a general direction, we are not trying to decide anything right now. We have several weeks of polls ahead of us where EVERYTHING about this Pokemon will be dissected, discussed, voted, and decided. The concept is a very basic guide for the creation process. It is hard to provide solid concept descriptions without basically designing the entire Pokemon right off the bat. Submissions should be written and chosen very carefully to avoid these problems.

Past Projects and Concept Toolbox:

Stratagem (Break The Mold), Tomohawk (Momentum) and Kitsunoh (Ultimate Scout) were great examples of an Actualization concept. Most of the "teammate" concepts (Voodoom and Volkraken) also broadly fell under this, actualizing a core that would change the metagame. The lion's share of CAP Concepts in the past have been Actualization concepts.

Fidgit (Pure Utility Pokemon) and Naviathan (Use the Boost to Get Through!) are examples of successful Archetype projects. We didn't have concepts at the time of Revenankh, but "Ultimate Bulk Up Sweeper" fits the definition of an Archetype concept.

Arghonaut (Decentralizer) and Colossoil (Stop the Secondary) are the best examples of previous successful Target projects, Arghonaut's was literally based around re-centering the metagame, while Colossoil's purpose was to target the most common users of status and secondary effects. Malaconda's concept (Type Equalizer) was also at its base a Target project.


CAP 25 so far:

Topic Leader: reachzero

Topic Leadership Team:
Last edited by a moderator:


the pastor of disaster
is a Top CAP Contributoris a Super Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Hello everyone! CAP 25 is going to be fundamentally different from past CAP projects in that it will be three Pokemon, a Fire/Water/Grass starter trio, to be referred to (until after the Name stage) as CAP 25f, 25w and 25g. This has profound consequences for the Concept stage, in that the concept chosen must apply to all three Pokemon--this means that if, for instance, Jumbao's concept were chosen, each of the three would have to fit into two Weathers (probably not the same two). If Pajantom's concept were chosen, each starter would explore a different aspect of trapping. This does not inherently require the starters to directly interact with each other, though they may.

I personally enjoy concepts that have something to teach us, and the advantage of this framework is that we can explore multiple aspects of an idea--we don't have to commit to only one path to approaching our concept, giving the project greater exploratory scope. I look forward to seeing what you have to submit!
  • Name - Set-Down
  • Description - Pokemon that punish the opponent for trying to set up on one of your other mons.
  • Justification - These Pokemon would fall under Target. A pokemon with this could punish pokemon that try to get in and set-up on one of your own. This would save you from being swept by a pokemon you have trouble hitting boosting all over you. Or they could work as an anti-hazards, since hazards are also sort of a form of set-up.
  • Questions To Be Answered
    • What moves/abilities best punish the opponents choice to set up?
    • If we go for pokemon that steals stat boosts, how would it best abuse the stat boosts?
  • Explanation - I just though something like this would be interesting, countering literally every stat-boosting pokemon. We could also opt for anti-hazards, or just really any setup if there are others I haven't mentioned. Psych Up, Magic Coat, and Snatch are 3 moves that come to mind.
Last edited:

Deck Knight

Blast Off At The Speed Of Light! That's Right!
is a Top CAP Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Final Submission
  • Name - Astounding Ability Actualization (Triple A)
  • Description - These Pokemon each maximize the potential of their given, separate abilities by coordinating their movepools and that ability's competitive effect.
  • Justification - This is an Actualization concept much like Cyclohm's original "Neglected Ability." In my research on what made Pokemon with "Starter Level" stats effective, the common denominator was they all had abilities they used to full effect with their other competitive aspects. This framework gives us a unique opportunity to A-B test some fairly powerful abilities we usually shy away from and bring out an effective competitive starter trio.
  • Questions To Be Answered -
    • Which Abilities are best suited to a full, comprehensive exploration of their specific mechanics?
    • Why does Ability seem to be the common factor in taking "starter-esque" Pokemon into prominence (e.g. Protean and Battle Bond Greninja, Contrary Serperior, Speed Boost Blaziken to Ubers, etc.)
    • What is the threshold where maximizing an ability goes toi far, such as Blaziken's combination of Swords Dance, strong attack and mid-grade speed, and high BP STABS with Speed Boost or Protean Greninja's huge speed and just-varied enough movepool in prior Generations?
    • How will introducing three specialized Pokemon into the metagame at once impact it overall?
    • Which type combinations along with the starter types are best suited to maximizing the potential of a specific ability, and why?
  • Explanation - Competitive Pokemon has suffered from a massive power creep for a long time. In order for a Pokemon to be effective, not only does it have to be fairly good generally, it also can't be directly outclassed. Considering our Framework, our Pokemon are already competing against Heatran/Volcarona, Toxapex/Keldeo/Greninja, and Ferrothorn/Kartana for offensive or defensive roles. However, each of those Pokemon have their own flaws that give our FWG CAP Trio space to explore if we are focused on a key niche for each of them.

    Let's take Grass for example, and Tough Claws. Tough Claws boosts one of the most incredibly CAP-relevant moves, Grass Knot, because it is a special contact attack. Only Mega Metagross ever even came close to utilizing this combination, and Mega-Meta was banned (for other reasons, of course). Grass could also use it's huge number of healing options with Triage, including priority Strength Sap that even outruns Bullet Punch. Nearly every Fire attack has a secondary effect chance perfect for Serene Grace or Sheer Force. Water has a few specific moves that would also love Serene Grace, but would also appreciate breaking through Gastrodon and Mollux with Mold Breaker. Suffice it to say, this concept gives us an ability to meet our Framework demands and think through a huge combination of synergistic types and abilities in a single project.
Last edited:

Granny Pie

Mafia Champion
  • Name: Death to the King!
  • Description: Pokemon that target top metagame threats and seek to counter or check the majority of them, either offensively or defensively.
  • Justification: This certainly falls under the Target archetype, and seeks to decentralize the current meta. With three Pokemon, several A and S-tier threats in CAP could each be singled out, analyzed, and knocked from their pedestals by one of the three, but while still faring well against or defeating each of the other two. This concept would also Target what it means to be a top metagame threat in CAP.
  • Questions to be answered:
    • What makes a threat a top metagame threat?
    • What Pokemon are worth being targetted and decentralized?
    • What would it take to target and threaten key threats in the current CAP metagame?
    • Is it possible to provide solid counterplay to a Pokemon that lacks such a counter?
    • What kind of changes would such a decentralization bring?
    • What previously downtrodden Pokemon could rise up in the new metagame in the absence of their high-tier counters?
    • What previously downtrodden Pokemon could rise up in the new metagame in the absence of high-tier Pokemon who did their job better or role-compressed better?
  • Explanation: CAP6 Arghonaut was an incredibly interesting process, seeking to decentralize the top OU threats at the time, like Scizor, Zapdos, and Heatran. Since CAP processes now focuses on the CAP metagame, CAP25 is the perfect opportunity to analyze the top threats of our own meta, and seek to dethrone them, and indirectly raise some counterparts of their competition. With three Pokemon, we can target more than one key threat, thoroughly analyze the current meta, and even completely turn it on its head. Plus, it's a great way to celebrate CAP, by taking one of our first concepts, and applying it to modernity in our own metagame.
Last edited:

Name: Par for the Cores

Description: Three Pokemon designed to form a cohesive core suitable for the CAP metagame.

Justification: This is an Actualization concept like most of the core creation concepts of the past. Fire-Water-Grass cores have been a staple of OU since Gen 4, but we don't really see those in the CAP metagame nowadays. We see Fire-Grass cores for balance (Heatran with M-Venu last gen and Bulu/Jumbao this gen), we see Fire-Water offense cores (Greninja with Volk or Blacephalon), and we see defensive Water-Grass cores (Toxapex with Ferro for hazards or Tang for Regen). However, we don't really see the full package unless somebody randomly jams Toxapex on a Sun team or Heatran on a stall team. Further, 3-mon cores in general have fallen a bit in Gen 7 because space is really tight on teams to deal with everything that requires an answer.

Questions to be Answered:
- What team archetypes would desire a three Pokemon core?
- How do three mon cores overcome the opportunity cost of taking up half of the available moveslots?
- What are the needs of each of the Fire, Water, and Grass typing in the CAP metagame and how can the combination of these cover those needs?
- What are the benefits of each of these typings and how do these benefits compliment each other?

Explanation: So I suppose I have to address the elephant in the room. This would be our fourth Perfect Pair CAP, and the other three all resulted in failures. However, it really wasn't the CAPs fault that those projects failed. Perfect Pair failed because Togekiss was just not as good as Zapdos, Major Third failed because Lucario was simply unfit for OU in Gen 6, and Plasmanta's unspellable concept failed because Mega-Gyarados simply didn't need any support. If we can control every month in the core, we should be able to make a core that lives up to expectations. Besides, what better concept is there to celebrate CAPs history than one the community has tried so many times without a major win.
Last edited:
Name: Once More, with Feeling!

Description: These CAPs would be designed to take ideas/concepts/gimmicks from past Pokemon, that either looked good on paper but didn't work in practice, or that just never worked in the first place, and revamp them into competitive viability.

Justification: This is largely a Target concept, focused on identifying Pokemon from the past that, for one reason or another, weren't able to cut it in the OU/CAP metagame and redoing the same underlying idea of that Pokemon in such a way that it could be competitively viable. This is not intended to "fix" bad Pokemon, so much as it is to find good ideas which were poorly executed in the past, and determine what, if anything, can be done to bring out the idea's full potential. This Concept can also fall under Actualization, by achieving the goals set by past Pokemon that were never fulfilled, ideally shedding light on what made them fail in the first place.

Questions to be Answered: Why did the selected Pokemon fail to make it in the OU/CAP metagame? Was their underlying idea or concept simply bad, or was it poorly executed? Are there simply some concepts, ideas or strategies that can never work in OU/CAP, or is it possible through the right combination of Stats, Typing, Moves and Abilities? Can these ideas be kept balanced while making them viable, or are they entirely broken when working properly? Is it worthwhile to pursue these failed ideas, or is it better to simply stick with the "accepted" norms of competitive Pokemon? If so, will this cause other, less "standardized" ideas and concepts to gain in popularity, or will the accepted norms always remain as such?

Explanation: Oftentimes in Pokemon, we have a Pokemon design that, on paper, looks to be perfectly viable and threatening, but when it's actually used in practice it can't quite live up to it's own hype. For example, when people first saw Rampardos and it's 165 base Attack, they assumed it would be a vastly powerful physical threat, one which every team would have to prepare for. However, when people actually started to use it, they found that Rampardo is plagued by a myriad number of problems (Less than ideal Stats, interesting but not very helpful Ability, etc.) that kept it from shining in the OU format. Other times, we have Pokemon that seem built for a very specific, if sometimes gimmicky, strategy, one which never gets used in OU. When I first saw Toxapex, with it's unique Ability in Merciless and varied ways of utilizing it, I immediately saw a strange kind of tank/wall breaker, using critical hits to plow through statistically superior foes. Competitive players, however, saw a wall with a useless main Ability. I think it would interesting, and potentially very informative, to see if ideas like these, that are considered to gimmicky, or that have been poorly executed, can be made viable in OU/CAP. With the special Framework of CAP 25, we can select 3 "failed" ideas of the past and see if they can be made viable.

EDIT: Removed the part from the Description section suggesting previous CAPs be viable targets of the Concept, as per the wise advice of Frostbiyt.
Last edited:
Name: Role Compression Madness

Description: Each of these 3 Pokemon provides its team with role compression in different ways.

Justification: This is a target concept, that attempts to addresses the issue of Role Compression. Past projects like Tomohawk or most recently Jumbao own their place in the meta to their amazing Role Compression. However, in these projects, the Role Compression wasn't really the main focus, it was simply a secondary effect of their concept. Instead this concept aims to focus on this idea in depth. This might not necessarily mean that well have three final products with as much role compression as possible, just that each one should serve as an example of how can this concept be achieved in different ways.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • How important is Role Compression for a Pokemon?
  • Which roles are the hardest to fit on a team at present?
  • In which different ways can Role Compression be achieved?
  • How much role compression should each starter pack, so that it is viable and balanced in the current metagame?
  • How can these Pokemon differentiate themselves from pre-existing ones with already good role compression, like Heatran, Jumbao, Tomohawk or Landorus-T, without being too overpowered?
  • Can typically "opposite" roles still be compressed together?
  • Which different kind of teams can better take advantage of these Pokemon?
Explanation: This concept is based on the one submitted by reachzero for CAP 23. However, unlike that one, which attempted to maximize Role Compression in just one Pokemon, this concept uses the Starters Framework to explore the different ways in which Role Compression can be achieved. There are many ways to do this, like packing multiple vital utility moves, having the bulk necessary to check multiple important Pokemon that would otherwise threaten your team, or having coverage to deal with those same threats offensively. Each one of the starters would try to accomplish this objective in their own unique way.
Name – Cause and Effect

Description – Pokémon that explore the potential of secondary effects

Justification – These Pokémon would be a target concept. While playing CAP, I’ve noticed secondary effects often take a backseat to good damage. The most notable example of this would be thunderbolt versus discharge in OU. It was only during the transition from ORAS to SM that moves like discharge began to rise in popularity. Looking at the suggested smogon sets for Pokémon like Zapdos (XY/SM) confirms this change. Exploring this shift in the meta would be interesting since there are many ways of spreading and using secondary effects. This concept also yields a lot of potential for counterplay with Pokémon in the CAP arsenal like Colossoil, Cyclohm, Gliscor, and Naviathan.

Questions To Be Answered

  • In what ways can additional effects be used effectively?
  • How would the sudden increase of additional effects impact the meta?
  • Would using abilities that remove additional effects to increase damage be considered “using” secondary effects?
  • What archetypes would appreciate the heightened focus on additional effects?
Explanation – After a rather thorough smack down of my previous suggestion (Super Hax), I’ve decided to take reachzero’s advice and focus more specifically on the potential of additional effects. There are many interesting tools we have available when it comes to moves with secondary effects, including some very reliable options. With such a wide array of moves at our disposal, it offers many unique takes on how to use them. As an example, we could go for a more support oriented defensive Pokémon. On the opposite end of the spectrum, we could aim for hyper-offensive Pokémon with the intent to cripple whatever opponent it touches. My interest for this concept only increases when you add the limitations of typing, BST, and competitive ability.

(Edit: changed the premise of my concept based on feed back from Reachzero and others. Left the original in a spoiler tab for reference.)

Name – Super Hax

Description – Pokémon that use moves that cause status, flinch, and critical hits to their advantage.

Justification – These Pokémon would be both an actualization and a target concept. While playing CAP, I’ve noticed status, flinch, and critical hit moves are less used for their secondary effects and, instead, used for just good damage. One of the most satisfying/rage-inducing things to do in Pokémon is to throw off a scald or discharge and get that 30% status on your opponent. It’s the same feeling you get when you get the 20% flinch using dark pulse or the lucky crit you needed. These moves can often change the results of a battle in a pinch. More specifically, Pokémon like paraflinch Jirachi and Togekiss are extremely fun to use when they work. I feel CAP could benefit from similar Pokémon that fill these roles effectively.

Questions To Be Answered –
  • How would the sudden increase of status impact the meta?
  • In which ways can Pokémon use these moves effectively?
  • How do you prevent such Pokémon from being limited to only a gimmick?
Explanation – I know this concept will be hit or miss for most players. I can understand the possible frustration a Pokémon like this would introduce to the CAP tier. The important thing to take note is that hax can also play a valuable support role for most teams. Paralysis gives teams speed control over their opponent. Pair it with flinch and it gives the attacking Pokémon the ability to stay in for long periods and deal with possible threats; however, this does not come without its risks. Burn also plays a strong support role in “boosting” the teams physical defense. It also provides chip damage and negates leftovers recovery. We have two guts users that would benefit from the status spam: Colossoil and Naviathan. It would be nice to use items other than flame orb on these Pokémon. If flinch is the biggest concern, we have many great inner focus Pokémon to support teams: Mega Gallade and Legendary Beasts. There are many interesting moves to be considered in this concept too. Inferno, Force Palm and Extrasensory are 3 that immediately come to mind. Z-Tailwind would also be a fun option since it adds the focus energy effect.
Last edited:


is a Top Artistis a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributor Alumnus
Name: The Bigger They Are

Description: A Pokémon that beats its opponent by using the opponent's strengths against itself.

Justification: This concept fits primarily in the Archetype category:
  • Certain team archetypes are highly disruptive to common battle strategies. For instance, at the cost of a turn, Trick Room teams turn a speed advantage into a disadvantage. This can be crippling for some teams and can force the opponent into a less familiar situation. Creating Pokémon that upsets the natural strengths people use Pokémon on a team for can be rewarding to teambuild and challenging to play against. Given that we have three Pokémon, we can explore ways of using an opponent's strength against itself for different team archetypes or, alternatively, in complement to one other.
Questions to be answered:
  • What strengths of Pokémon do people look for when building a team, either by the Pokémon itself or with teammates?
  • What strengths of Pokémon do people beware when facing against a team, either by the Pokémon itself or with teammates?
  • What strengths of Pokémon can be exploited?
  • What team roles can Pokémon that exploit strengths take?
  • What opportunity cost must exploiting a strength have that makes it not too situational? I.e.:
    • What ways of exploiting a strength are worthwhile?
    • How much of a penalty must the exploit make for it to be worthwhile?
    • What slots (team slots, move slots, item slots, etc.) would people be willing to spend on an exploit?
    • How much of a turn cost would make the exploit worthwhile?
  • To what extent is exploiting an Pokémon's strengths part of the game's mechanics? To what extent is it psychological?
Explanation: I was inspired by Discord discussion on punishing set-up sweepers, which can mean something like stealing boosts or using their boosted stat against them (e.g., using Punishment/Foul Play or causing confusion damage). Additionally, we also finished Jumbao, which uses Trace to gain better matchups against Landorus-T and Heatran, by using Intimidate and Flash Fire against them. As mentioned in the Justification part, Trick Room turns Pokémon's speed investment against them. There are many other ways of taking a Pokémon's strengths and turning them against itself! This concept is wide enough that we can execute it in many different ways. This is great for the framework, since we have three Pokémon we can experiment directions with. Not only that, but this concept makes it easier to build the 'mons for CAP's power level, given the ability and stat constraints starters have.

Edit 7/3/18: There was some great discussion on Discord yesterday. :) We talked about more branches this concept can take. For instance, one 'mon can use Counter/Mirror Coat/Metal Burst and then use pinch effects when the 'mon's health gets low. This fits naturally with starters, which get Overgrow/Blaze/Torrent. (Thanks, Revi!) Another direction that can be taken is punishing stat drops from Defog, Intimidate, and Sticky Web through Contrary/Defiant/Competitive. (Thanks, reach!) We can also target specific strategies with this concept. For instance, Garchomp punishes VoltTurn: Volt Turn get stopped by its Ground typing, and U-Turn users take passive damage from its Rough Skin. Reach provided the example of Rattled punishing Knock Off and U-Turn.

There are a lot more ways we can pursue this concept than the ones listed! If this concept gets chosen, I expect we'll have a lot to discuss in Discord and in Concept Assessment.


Feedback on this concept is appreciated!
Last edited:
Name: Ultimate Rock-Paper-Scissors

Description: Each starter is tuned to be uniquely counter-able by another.

Justification: This is an Actualization/Archetype concept, where the Pokemon to be created should each counter one another, and do so better than any other counter. This means that there should be some pressure on teams to not just pack the standard counters for the starters' types. The process should illuminate how countering works. Because of the vast diversity of possible Pokemon, tuning the traits of each Pokemon so that they aren't better countered by another will be challenging, but since we have so much control, it should be doable. Other concepts have looked at cooperation between Pokemon, but the Rock-Paper-Scissors dynamic is equally if not more core to the tactics and team-building in Pokemon.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • Which factors besides type advantage play into countering?
  • What makes a good counter to a specific Pokemon?
  • What different ways are there to be a counter?
  • How can the starters avoid being best countered by pre-existing Pokemon that hard-counter a large range of Pokemon (like Tomohawk or Heatran) without becoming overly flexible?
  • In what ways will an explicit Rock-Paper-Scissors dynamic change the metagame?
Explanation: I thought of this concept as basically the mirror image of core concepts. Like them, it deals with how the three starters interact with each other. In this way, it uses the unique opportunity of designing multiple Pokemon in a single CAP project to do something not possible outside of a celebration CAP. Unlike a core, it examines how Pokemon work against each other rather than how they complement each other. This part works really well with the requirements the framework places on the design process. The fixed typing of at least partial Fire/Water/Grass already partly deals with the least interesting part of countering, and the near-required range of BSTs helps with keeping the starters on a parallel plane where they each have near the same raw power but are each strongly-countered or counter their peers. There are a lot of interesting ways besides a type advantage that Pokemon can counter each other. Arghonaut was able to counter physical set-up sweepers using its ability, Tomohawk using its ability and moveset, others using specialized moves and stat distribution. CAP25 can explore these ways with a carefully-tuned trio.
Last edited:


Master Procraster
is a CAP Contributor
Name: Typed Together

Description: A Pokemon that can create a core with a Pokemon that shares a type of the CAP.

Justification: This concept falls under the Actualization category, as it explores the idea of the shared type core, which is also called type spam by many people in the community. Shared type cores are not too rare in the metagame already, but there is absolutely room to grow for these cores, and it really lets us research how a core interacts when they share weaknesses together, and how each core can overcome those weaknesses.

Questions To Be Answered:
  • What benefits does a shared type core carry compared to a core with differently typed Pokemon?
  • Are the extra vulnerability and weaknesses brought in by the core offset by the benefits?
  • How would the metagame likely react to the shared type core?
  • Are there any major shared type cores in the metagame currently? What can be learned from their viability?
  • What kind of roles would the CAP fulfill for the selected shared type core that the partner cannot?
  • Should CAP be able to shift from one viable shared type core to another?
  • Are there ways to create shared type cores without relying on offensive type spam?
Explanation: This is once again a partner concept, which have been known to have a bad wrap due to their generally shoddy execution. However, I think this concept is different because of the different type of core it presents. Shared types cores are a much more risky core than is usually presented, as they may not have the type benefits that other cores may have. They also tend to be offensive in nature, with the legendary bird spam lingering back in the minds of gen 6 and psychic spam still persisting today. This concept offers a look into what makes them tick, while also giving the chance to make some very unique styles of shared type cores that otherwise have not been tried or been successful.
Last edited:


Mercy Main Btw
Name - Undiscovered Potential

Description - Each of these Pokemon has a strong ability that has no usage.

Justification - This concept falls under the Actualization: There are a lot of powerful abilities that has no usage, so this concept will allow us to explore all of them, in order to find which of them has more potential.

Questions To Be Answered -
  • What makes these abilities unviable? Are they balanced?
  • Can some of these abilities be useful to the metagame? How can the meta answer to them?
  • Are there some abilities that can suit well for a Fire/Water/Grass Pokemon?
Explanation - For one reason or another, most abilities can't be used, despite they could be very useful, wasting their potential.
Most of their user have bad stats and/or typing, like Tinted Lens users, where the most powerful Pokemon that can use it is Yanmega in RU, but there are cases when their owner is too powerful for the tier, like Mega Kangaskhan's Parental Bond.
We have a lot of option on both the offensive and defensive sides with abilities like No Guard, Speed Boost, Parental Bond, Tinted Lens or Filter, Dazzling, Stamina.

Feedback will be appreciated.
Last edited:
Name - Pinch Me, I'm Dreaming

Description - Uses the abilities or items which operate "in a pinch", or the potential threat of the use of those abilities and/or items.

Justification - Actualization. All starter pokemon have the "in a pinch" ability, while only having one other ability. As the "in a pinch" abilities are often poor in consideration to the Hidden Ability, there's no guessing around which ability the pokemon is using. Everyone knows Serperior is running Contrary. Everyone knows that Feraligatr is running Sheer Force. The reasoning for the "potential" threat of the use of these items and abilities means that it can be used to pressure other opposing mon. The "in a pinch" berries are more often seen as a result of their utility, but it feels like a perfect combination to have the "in a pinch" berries combine with the "in a pinch" abilities.

Questions to be answered -
  • What is it about the current incarnation of starters makes them unuseable with the "in a pinch" abilities?
  • Are some "in a pinch" type abilities more effective than others, and if so, how are those made more viable?
  • How balanced is it to have an ability that works/operates intentionally around 33% or lower, and how much does that dictate what defensive stats CAP25f/w/g needs?
  • What abilities are viable enough to be taken as an alternative without overshadowing the in a pinch ability?

Name- First Come, First Served (previously Speed Demons)

Description- Each pokemon will explore a different method of allowing your team to move first.

Justification- This is mostly an Archetype project, although the category exists in a more lateral way than most- the role of "speed control" (term I'll use to describe the ability to let your team move first) can manifest in many different ways and can be anything from fully supportive to fully defensive to maximum offense. To explore the contrast between all of these options will be interesting!


-What are the most viable forms of speed control?
-What are the underused forms of speed control? What are their unique merits?
-How do opposing forms of speed control interact? Is there a pyramid or cyclic nature as to how different methods of speed beat each other?
-What is the importance of speed? What value is moving first for different team compositions?


Moving first has always been an important part of pokemon and has changed every generation- gen 1 was all about paralysis, gen 3 gave us abilities, gen 4 introduced the choice scarf sweeper, gen 5 gave the weather speed boost, gen6 came with powerful priority users and gen7 changed the game once again with Psychic Terrain. There is a complex and incredibly interesting relationship between methods of moving first and the battle for dominant speed control method over the generations should highlight that a little. Exploring that to find new and powerful strategies for the current metagame could be a very insightful project, and we might also be able to find a new strength in underused methods! The opportunity to explore something defensive (like prankster tomo), offensive (like scarf volkraken) or utility (like sticky web necturna) all in the same project will be very cool!
Last edited:
This is my first ever CAP-Concept, so feel free to criticize!

  • Name - Environment Control
  • Description - Three Mons utilizing different kinds of effects related to 'environmental' factors like hazards, weather or terrain.
  • Justification - This is an Archetype concept: Each Mon would fill one (or maybe even more, who knows?) roles related to the 'environmental' factors in competitive battles. The broad range of ways to interact not directly with the opponent, but with the surroundings of the battle gives us a lot of room to explore and to decide which of these strategies we actually want to implement, especially as we are doing three Mons at once. The actual implementation of these general roles gives this concept an Actualization side as well.
  • Questions To Be Answered -
    • What are the existing environmental factors and their related roles?
    • Which of these roles does the metagame have plenty of, which of these do we want to implement more of? Are there underutilized/overutilized environmental factors we want to support/counter?
    • Which of these roles suit(s) each one of CAP25f/w/g best?
    • Should the Mons be completely dedicated to performing these roles or do we want them to have significant additional value/role compression (possibly even with different sets) as well? What other roles might they fulfill?
    • How will three more Mons with a more 'indirect' approach to combat impact the metagame? Will other Mons with similar/counteracting functionality rise in popularity?
  • Explanation - Entry hazards and weather have been important and sometimes even defining aspects of competitive Pokémon for a long time. Since the addition of the Tapus in Gen 7 the four different kinds of terrain also have been used to a varying degree in OU/CAP, as all four Tapus are more or less viable threats in the metagame. Some of the strongest Mons in the metagame like Landorus-T (Stealth Rock setter) or Tomohawk (Spinner) owe a big part of their popularity to performing roles related to environmental factors. Creating three new Mons that fulfill different kinds of roles of such kind should prove to be interesting not only during the creation process itself, but also afterwards, as we look at the potential metagame shifts our new additions might result in. We also should think about whether there are potential strategies not yet explored (Ion Deluge comes to my mind, but there are probably more), potentially leading to a significant diversification of the metagame.
Edit: I confused Archetype and Target... not anymore, though!
Last edited:
  • Name - These Shackles Make Me Mortal
  • Description - Three Pokemon with godlike strengths that are intentionally held down through well-placed, overwhelming weaknesses.
  • Justification -
    • Archetype: Between Landorus-Therian, Ash-Greninja and Kyurem-Black, there's many Pokemon in the CAP metagame who at first glance ought to be so powerful they shouldn't be allowed, but on second glance, have crippling weaknesses which keep them in check. These were all Pokemon that were designed to be powerful legendaries, but by complete accident, they found themselves as simply having unique, but balanced roles that could have never be healthy without their weaknesses... which contrasts poorly with all the times GameFreak tried to make similar designs, whether it was using a counterintuitive typing for a defensive role like Vespiqueen, or simply building off a bad ability like Slaking, and failed miserably. This concept aims to pull off intentionally what has only ever worked by accident, mixing the worst traits given to PU Pokemon with the kind of roles one could only find in Ubers, to make three powerful Pokemon that have comfortable, creative counterplay to deal with them.
  • Questions to be Answered -
    • How do massive strengths and key weaknesses interact with each other? How well can one lead into the other to create Pokemon with unique downsides to their great potential?
    • How far could we go with such massive power before it becomes unhealthy? Would it be better for these Pokemon to do one thing incredibly well, or could they be given a wealth of different strengths all at once?
    • Subsequently, what massive weaknesses could be attached to those strengths to make key flaws in their playstyle? Could these weaknesses be so well-integrated that we could even justify throwing in the absolute bottom-of-the-barrel?
    • Could entirely new playstyles to the CAP metagame come about through this concept? Can the godlike strength required to potentially create those playstyles be healthily balanced out by these weaknesses?
  • Explanation - this is a re-edit of the same idea i threw out last CAP:
    i view this concept as a fundamentally evolved version of the kind of submissions new posters make that end up just being something like "[pokemon with bad weakness], But Good This Time"; all of those submissions could have something interesting going for them, but because they decided on having a specific weakness before anything else, it's severely limited in scope. the intent behind this concept, then, is to weave any extreme strength and weakness together with far more nuance, allowing for a lot of potential unique designs.
    obviously, the twist now is we'd get three different paths to go down with this concept, which i think helps its exploration greatly. rather than having to stick to any one major strength and weakness (and thus, only really explore specifically just those strengths/weaknesses), all three of CAP25's creations can work with wildly different roles and intended counterplay, giving us much more to learn from.
Last edited:
I'm a newcomer to this project, so please feel free to criticize.
  • Name - Status Update
  • Description - Pokemon that are able to utilize the full, unbridled power and influence that status conditions, volatile or otherwise, could potentially have if they were given the opportunity.
  • Justification - This concept would fall under the Target justification, as the idea behind it is to focus on the potential utilization of status conditions in a new light.
  • Questions To Be Answered
    • In what ways could the strategies behind status conditions be updated with new concepts?
    • What types of status conditions need a change?
  • Explanation - While status conditions are a major game-changer in the current metagame already, I feel that new strategies and concepts could arise from utilizing ideas that haven't really worked in other situations. What initially comes to my mind is the ability Merciless, which deals guaranteed critical hits on poisoned Pokemon. However, the ability is exclusive to Toxapex's evolutionary line, whose heavily-defensive stats make it next to impossible to utilize such an offensively-inclined ability. Other ideas revolve around the usage of other types of status alterations like Psycho Shift, Follow Me, Gravity, etc.


Not Exactly Helping
is a Pre-Contributor
Since I have yet to come up with a good concept myself, I thought I would give some (hopefully helpful) criticism to some of the concepts already submitted.
Name - Set-Down
Description - Pokemon that punish the opponent for trying to set up on one of your other mons.
We have Tomohawk and Arghonaut and to a lesser extent Toxapex and Clefable that already check setup sweepers. Personally, I don't really see the need for another phazer, let alone three more phazers in the meta.
Name: Death to the King!
Description: Pokemon that target top metagame threats and seek to counter or check the majority of them, either offensively or defensively.
I feel like this is something that already happens at a gradual pace through the normal process. When a new CAP is being created, it has to be able to stand up to the top threats or it risks limiting its viability, which naturally causes the top tier mons to become less viable.
Also, I think tying a CAP to a specific Pokemon is risky. Just look at Voodoom. Its concept was to be the perfect partner to one specific Pokemon, but as that Pokemon became less viable, so did Voodoom.
Name: Renewal
Description: Three Pokemon, each of which attempts to return an outdated Pokemon to viability.
Just like the concept above, I think tying a CAP to a specific Pokemon is risky.
Name: Once More, with Feeling!
Description: These CAPs would be designed to take ideas/concepts/gimmicks from past Pokemon, either official or CAP, that either looked good on paper but didn't work in practice, or that just never worked in the first place, and revamp them into competitive viability.
I like this one, but I think that it should focus on official Pokemon so that it doesn't just end up replacing a CAP with a better version.
Name – Super Hax
Description – Pokémon that use moves that cause status, flinch, and critical hits to their advantage.
"Hax" IMO, is one of the worst aspects of Pokemon. I think this suggestion would be better if it instead focused on taking advantage of secondary effects of non-flinching moves rather than on being more like the new and improved paraflinch Togekiss.
Name: Ultimate Rock-Paper-Scissors
Description: Each of the starters is the best counter to another, in a Rock-Paper-Scissors fashion.
This seems a bit too general and it's something that we'll probably end up doing anyways without needing a concept to dictate that.
  • Name - Sides of the Same Coin
  • Description - Three Pokémon that use the same ability in three unique and interesting ways.
  • Justification - This concept falls under Actualization and Archetype as it explores variability in abilities and explores different ways abilities can approach a single archetype or different ways to approach how to use an ability for a single archetype. It also explores whether these flexible abilities provide an advantage over an ability that has a singular purpose such as Guts.
  • Questions To Be Answered
    • What abilities can be approached in multiple ways or have multiple uses? Is there a reason why these abilities have this attribute?
    • How many ways can a single archetype or ability be approached? Are some methods more viable than others and for what reason?
    • Does being able to use an ability in multiple ways give it an advantage over a very focused ability?
    • What about a Pokémon besides its ability dictate how it performs in-game? What is most important and what is least?
  • Explanation - Some of the most potentially strongest abilities come out of using it outside of their intended purpose. The first thing that comes to mind is Triage, originally seeming to be a defensive ability for Comfey before being unleashed into Balanced Hackmons as one of the best offensive abilities in the game when combined with Oblivion Wing. Mixing and matching tools to create something unique outside of what the creators envisioned is something I love about games as a whole, including CAP. There are many potential candidates for multi-use abilities such as Triage, Prankster, Disguise, etc. that could be fully utilized and explored with different moves, stats, and typings. I feel that either one, fitting an ability to a single archetype multiple or using a single ability for multiple archetypes, are just as viable and could even be combined; however, the latter seems a bit more manageable as encouraging using an ability a certain way for a single role three times would be incredibly challenging. An example of this is using No Guard for either hitting powerful moves consistently (Wall Breaker), shutting down the opponent with a status to then set-up (Set-Up Sweeper), or using the status to set hazards (Lead). This is just one example and there are many more than just this, giving this concept a lot of leg-room to develop, something needed for doing three different CAPs under one concept.
Name: Welcome to the Matrix

Description: Each of the starters makes good use of one of either Gravity, Magic Room, or Wonder Room

Justification: This concept straddles the line between Actualization and Archetype by attempting to create three Pokémon that can effectively use or broaden the scope of some underused field effects. For additional clarification, each of the three CAPs would use a different one of the three proposed effects.

Questions to be Answered:
What is the optimal way to utilize Gravity? To ensure that Ground moves land safely? To make risky coverage less so? A mix of both?
In what ways can a Pokémon make use of Magic Room without harming its own team too much?
How important are items to the current metagame?
In what ways does Wonder Room change the individual and team dynamics of common CAP threats?
How can Wonder Room best be utilized? Offensively? Defensively? As an over-arching team dynamic?

Admittedly, I've never seen the movie; but, from what I do know, the Matrix makes things weird, much like these three field effects.
Gravity's ability to remove ground invulnerabilities is somewhat outclassed by Zygarde and Thousand Arrows, but could be quite interesting in conjunction with the raised accuracy for all moves. Landorus, in both forms, has occasionally been seen to run the move to facilitate its sweeps with Earthquake and Earth Power. Additionally, paired with lower-accuracy coverage moves such as Fire Blast, Focus Blast, Thunder, and Blizzard, a sweep could be relatively easy. Though, you could also make a Gravity-setter that plays a more supportive role, allowing moves like Sing to have over 80% accuracy while also conferring the previously mentioned offensive benefits to teammates.
Magic and Wonder Rooms meanwhile have seen practically no use at all, with the former being a niche way for Mega-Alakazam to muscle past Chansey by nullifying Eviolite and the latter falling entirely by the wayside. Magic Room interfering with items takes the power out from behind Life Orb, Band, and Specs users, while also toning the speed down on Scarfers. Eviolite walls, like Chansey, can struggle without their defensive boosts, while preventing chip damage and passive healing from Rocky Helmet and Leftovers can also put slightly more pressure on the opponent. Unfortunately, the downside to Magic Room is that those same effects are directed at your team as well, making many players consider the move as too double-edged.
Wonder Room presents much of the opposite problem, in that the effect of swapping defenses can seem lackluster. Effective use of the move can be either offensive or defensive, switching the room on or off to either hit your opponent on their weaker defense or tank a hit with your stronger one. On a broader level, simply throwing the room up and leaving it in play can also interfere with an opponent's checks and counters for common threats, but with Pokémon such as Celesteela, Toxapex, and Magearna running around, strong dual defenses considerably weaken the strategy.
Last edited:


Not Exactly Helping
is a Pre-Contributor

Name: Make Weather Great Again

Description: Each pair of starters is dedicated to a different type of weather, excluding Rain.

Justification: I think this concept best fits the Archetype category. Currently, rain is the only weather that can have an entire team dedicated to it. These CAPs would aim to make the other types of weather equally viable by either creating something to fill niches where nothing currently resides or by making the Pokemon that could potentially fill these niches more viable.

Questions to be Answered:
What makes rain so much better than the other types of weather?
Do we need to just copy existing rain Pokemon and apply them to other weathers or are there ways to abuse weather that haven't been explored by existing Pokemon?
Is it even possible to make full hail teams viable or would we have to settle for just making semi-hail viable?
Is the name of this concept to controversial?

Explanation: We have the unique opportunity with CAP 25 to choose a concept that actually needs multiple Pokemon which, as we saw with Jumbao, weather is something that needs more than just one new Pokemon to make it viable. I hesitated posting this concept because we just did a weather focused CAP, but I think that that could actually help speed up the process since weather will be so fresh in everyone's minds and we can look at Jumbao and its process to see how the ideas behind it played out in the meta.
Last edited:
Hello all! Long-time lurker, first-time poster, with what I hope is an interesting concept...

Name: Fearless Firsts

Description: Each CAP is designed to be an excellent Lead thanks to any combination of typing, ability, and moveset, ideally all being great leads in different ways.

Justification: This is absolutely an Archetype category. The existence of Team Preview has mostly made the idea of dedicated leads obsolete, a relic of past generations. While we still have suicide leads, generally leads are too easily countered. On the flip side of that, several past CAPs have attempted to create versatile, unpredictable threats in an effort to inject more "mystery" and prediction into dueling. I feel we've now arrived at a place where there is a real need for versatile Leads that can Scout the wild, different threats we face in modern CAP.

Questions to Be Answered:
- What makes a Pokemon a great lead?
- How might we redefine what a "Lead" is in an era of team preview?
- Does the role of Lead de facto require access to Hazard or Hazard control? Is it possible to create a lead without these things?
- Is it even possible to make three different leads that "feel" differently, despite fulfilling a similar team role?
- Can we design Pokemon that can legitimately displace current S-lister Tomohawk, one of the few true leads in the meta, while still being relatively balanced?

Explanation: On its face this may seem a poor idea for Celebration Cap, as it somewhat limits the ability to run our Trio together. However, I actually think it makes perfect sense. First there is the delicious flavor of our "Starter Trio" CAP being LITERAL Starters in battle. Second, I am really into the questions I posted above. If we were making only one "Fearless First", I think we'd immediately get pulled down the rabbit hole of making a new Tomahawk or Fidget. By having three pokemon to account for, I think it will require us to truly delve into what makes a great Lead and how a Lead can mean different things to different teams. Historically there were three kinds of leads (Attacking Lead, Suicide Lead, Dedicated Lead), and perhaps that can focus discussion in an optimal way with three CAPs to work with.
Last edited:


You can call me Jiggly
is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a CAP Contributor
  • Name - Hazards, Examined Three Ways
  • Description - These Pokemon each work to either win the hazard game in their own way.
  • Justification - Functionally this creates three very distinct Archetype Pokémon, centred on one of the most defining aspects of Pokémon, hazards. This is something very suitable to our Starter CAP project, because it allows us to compare the large variety of ways in which a hazard war is fought and won.
  • Questions To Be Answered
    • What hazards can be considered the most useful? How does each playstyle favour certain hazards over others?
    • Is winning hazard wars enough for a mon to be viable, or does a mon now need more than just that to see usage? If that's not enough on it's own, what level of role compression is required to make a viable Pokemon that still primarily focusses on winning hazard wars?
    • What is the most important aspect of hazards - keeping them off your side of the field, or maintaining them on your opponents?
    • With the high presence of Defog, is it at all feasible to protect hazards from being removed from the field?
  • Explanation - Hazards are pretty darned fundamental in competitive Pokemon. Practically every team has 'em, every team has a way to clear 'em, and some of them are strong enough to single-handedly make certain Pokemon viable or unviable. And yet CAP hasn't really explored them beyond occasionally giving certain Pokemon Rapid Spin or Defog since the age of Fidgit, where Rapid Spin was still essential.

    There are many approaches we can take to 'winning the hazard war'. I would personally define Setting (Getting them up), Protecting (Keeping them up against moves like Defog and Rapid Spin), Preventing (Stopping them from going up), and Removing (Getting rid of them) as an easy quartet of ways each mon could tackle this, giving us a degree of flexibility. I would also tentatively add a 5th Abusing to the list, whether that be a Pokemon that secures a lot of KOs that it normally wouldn't due to hazards, or is able to consistently make usage of the pressure by forcing opponents to switch, or we could even consider a Pokemon that is empowered by the presence of Sticky Web, or Toxic Spikes. Suffice to say, there is a wide range of aspects we can consider when creating these three Pokemon, both ground we have a basic idea of how to tackle, and ground which is truly Terra Incognita.
Last edited:
Just an FYI, I will be referring to Move Type Changing Abilities as MTCAs.

Name: -ize/-ate is Our Fate

Description: Each starter uses at least one of the move type changing abilities in a different way.

Justification: This concept falls into both Actualization and Archetype. The -ize and -ate abilities used to be immensely popular with Mega Pinsir, Mega Gardevoir, and Mega Salamence running rampant. However, all of these Pokemon filled the same couple roles: set-up sweeper or wall breaker. It is obvious that these abilities add to the offensive prowess of a Pokemon, but it would be an admittedly lackluster and uninteresting CAP if we just slapped these powerful abilities on a sweeper or breaker and that was it. It would be MUCH more educational if we delved into what these abilities have to offer outside of these specific offensive roles. This concept would allow us to explore how effective a Pokemon can be with one of these abilities as another tool in a Pokemon's arsenal, rather than the foundation of its competitive viability.

Questions to be Answered:
- How could MTCAs be used on a more defensive Pokemon?
- In what ways could MTCAs positively interact with status moves?
- In what ways could having two possible MTCAs affect possible sets, in-battle scouting, and 4MSS?
- If CAP is given multiple competitively viable abilities, is what circumstances would another ability be more favorable than an MTCA and vice versa?
- With most of the competitively viable Pokemon with MTCAs being Mega Evolutions, how would an MTCA operate on a Pokemon with a hold item?
- Would a Pokemon be more or less powerful if it had access to an MTCA that was different from its typing?

MTCAs used to be incredibly powerful, and to an extent, they still are. Just look at Mega Mence. However, the nerf from a 30% to 20% increase in power has caused the popularity of these abilities to drop significantly. This drop in power got me thinking: what if these abilities weren't used to boost primary stab attacks, but rather provide strong, reliable coverage options? MTCAs could provide offensive Pokemon with essentially a weak third STAB, or defensive Pokemon with strong options against checks and counters. If our CAPs get multiple competitive abilites or even more than one MTCA, the possible sets that our CAP could sport would be crazy. This would allow for multiple different roles to be successfully run on the same Pokemon. When you see a Mega-Pinsir on team preview, you know exactly what it's gonna do. But when you see a Sylveon, you're a lot less sure. Sure there are only so many viable Sylveon sets so it's easy to narrow down the possibilities, but imagine three Pokemon with the same unpredictability as Sylveon, but even better. There is a lot more we can do with these abilities than just slap them on an already strong attacker. There is also so much more we can learn about from these abilities, such as type match ups, scouting, set building, movepool variety, and so much more.
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)